|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Dec 21, 2007 18:26:29 GMT -5
Except two comments 1. Is Bendis writing Thor now? 2. Hey, guys who hopped aboard at the relaunch? You may wanna stop and segue into your "Marvel has raped my childhood" speeches. Because I just... ...there are simply no words... pics.livejournal.com/redorion/pic/000pb4x0 |
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Dec 21, 2007 23:05:48 GMT -5
Aw crap.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Dec 22, 2007 1:21:10 GMT -5
I'm sorry, but: WTF...  !!! What's going on inside the minds of the creative heads at Marvel these days...? What's up with all this rampant cross-sexing, especially when it comes to villians...? I dunno, but I do know that any psychiatrist worth her/his salt would have a field day with them... We ALREADY have (sort of...) a female version of Loki in the Marvel Pantheon... it's called: the Enchantress...!!! Unless these days she's a burly, bearded berserker (I'm channeling Stan now), but somehow I doubt it...! That doesn't seem to be the way these guys' minds work... I suspect it wouldn't be sexy for them... ;D At least the Mandarin's still a guy, albeit a much older one now... Who's next, I wonder...? The Red Skull...? The Kingpin...? Galactus...? |
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Dec 22, 2007 2:57:45 GMT -5
And, Santa Doom...? You must be just LOVINNNNNG this, don'tcha...?  Well, I don't believe in you, so there you go...!!!  Everybody knows presents are delivered by the Big Three Wise Men: Reed, Tony and Hank...  |
|
|
|
Post by Shiryu on Dec 22, 2007 7:08:03 GMT -5
Sic!  Let's hope the issue explains (and hopefully corrects) this |
|
fatbob
Force Works-er
Posts: 27
|
Post by fatbob on Dec 22, 2007 8:56:19 GMT -5
I had to check it wasn't April 1st. My first reaction was "This has to be a joke right??" But it's being discussed on other boards as well- and some people are excited about the idea and are even defending it!!!!
Apparently going back to the mythology, Loki was known as a shape shifter and did change gender at times. Don't shoot the messanger! I think the idea is crap too, just warning you what you will find out there on other boards.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Dec 22, 2007 18:11:25 GMT -5
That's actually my main problem with this change. What exactly can Loki do as a female that Enchantress can't? Be an evil, sexy green-wearing sorceress who is untrustworthy and close to Thor?
Oh, wait...
Heaven forbid people express a dissenting view from yours!
It's not even "going back to the mythology", it's actually "going back to Marvel history." Marvel's Loki has changed shape PLENTY of times. Though in the mythology, he did give birth to an 8 legged horse.
I'm praying it's just a trick (very apt from the Trickster God) or something short lived. It's a bad idea in general, but even worse since Enchantress exists!
|
|
fatbob
Force Works-er
Posts: 27
|
Post by fatbob on Dec 23, 2007 9:10:12 GMT -5
Do you know, it never occured to me that my post might be seen as intolerant of others points of view- thank you so much for pointing that out to me, I'll try very hard not to make the same mistake again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Dec 26, 2007 9:37:44 GMT -5
I so love when people complain about things that actual have a bases in the myths.
Yes Loki was a woman at times in the Norse myths. Loki was a shape shifter in Norse myth and appeared many times as a female.
Before you attack JMS, try reading some of the actual Norse legends, and find out he is drawing some of his stuff from there.
I can't believe you compared this to bimbotron. *shaking head*
|
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Dec 26, 2007 9:39:16 GMT -5
That's actually my main problem with this change. What exactly can Loki do as a female that Enchantress can't? Be an evil, sexy green-wearing sorceress who is untrustworthy and close to Thor? Oh, wait... Heaven forbid people express a dissenting view from yours! It's not even "going back to the mythology", it's actually "going back to Marvel history." Marvel's Loki has changed shape PLENTY of times. Though in the mythology, he did give birth to an 8 legged horse. I'm praying it's just a trick (very apt from the Trickster God) or something short lived. It's a bad idea in general, but even worse since Enchantress exists! Heaven forbid, others have a different opinion then you doom. LOL |
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Dec 26, 2007 10:49:33 GMT -5
Heaven forbid, others have a different opinion then you doom. LOL I did not express shock, horror and disgust at the idea that- *GASP*- people might DISAGREE with me!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Dec 26, 2007 11:06:45 GMT -5
Heaven forbid, others have a different opinion then you doom. LOL I did not express shock, horror and disgust at the idea that- *GASP*- people might DISAGREE with me!!!!!! Hmmm looked like you did to me, but whatever. You go ahead and hate something based on actually mythology. No skin off my nose. I do find it funny that you think it is a bad idea for no reason though. OH well, go enjoy NA. |
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Dec 26, 2007 11:18:15 GMT -5
I so love when people complain about things that actual have a bases in the myths. Yes Loki was a woman at times in the Norse myths. Loki was a shape shifter in Norse myth and appeared many times as a female. Before you attack JMS, try reading some of the actual Norse legends, and find out he is drawing some of his stuff from there. I can't believe you compared this to bimbotron. *shaking head* But BK, 3 things: 1) We're not really discussing actual Norse mythology here, since this site isn't called "Norse Mythology Fans Assemble!"; we're discussing a heavily mythology-influenced superhero book (as per the original interpretation by Lee & Kirby) within the MU, which is by itself it's own mythology, after a fashion... Within that context, Loki, though still a shape-shifter, has always been basically a male entity, that's why some of us hope it's all part of a trick... After all, if we would wish to adhere steadfastedly to Norse Mythology canon, as you seem to suggest, we should have never seen Balder in the book in modern times, as he was killed through Loki's machinations! 2) We see it as a recent trend within Marvel to switch the sexes of a number of characters, especially villians... 3) We think it's unnecessary, because of the preexisting character of the Enchantress, already firmly embedded within the (Marvel) Thor mythos... |
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Dec 26, 2007 13:28:40 GMT -5
I so love when people complain about things that actual have a bases in the myths. Yes Loki was a woman at times in the Norse myths. Loki was a shape shifter in Norse myth and appeared many times as a female. Before you attack JMS, try reading some of the actual Norse legends, and find out he is drawing some of his stuff from there. I can't believe you compared this to bimbotron. *shaking head* But BK, 3 things: 1) We're not really discussing actual Norse mythology here, since this site isn't called "Norse Mythology Fans Assemble!"; we're discussing a heavily mythology-influenced superhero book (as per the original interpretation by Lee & Kirby) within the MU, which is by itself it's own mythology, after a fashion... Within that context, Loki, though still a shape-shifter, has always been basically a male entity, that's why some of us hope it's all part of a trick... After all, if we would wish to adhere steadfastedly to Norse Mythology canon, as you seem to suggest, we should have never seen Balder in the book in modern times, as he was killed through Loki's machinations! 2) We see it as a recent trend within Marvel to switch the sexes of a number of characters, especially villians... 3) We think it's unnecessary, because of the preexisting character of the Enchantress, already firmly embedded within the (Marvel) Thor mythos... 1) You can't talk about Thor with mythology, that is the bases of the charater, if you get rid of that, he is just a nother guy in tights. 2)I agree with that recent trend, you will notice however that that trend has been confined to bendis, who does not even explain why he is doing it. 3) Enchantress and Loki (being female or not) are nothing alike. Past the very basic idea of they both are gods and both use magic. It would short of be like comparing Wasp to Yellowjacket, they both shrink, they both are named after stinging insects, they both shot energy. Yet they are not the same charater. Sorry, but I don't see your complaints as being well thought out since they are based on one page of a comic. At least JMS is using the myths that the charater is based on rather then turning a robot into the now sex aid like bendis. |
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Dec 26, 2007 13:46:50 GMT -5
I did not express shock, horror and disgust at the idea that- *GASP*- people might DISAGREE with me!!!!!! Hmmm looked like you did to me, but whatever. You go ahead and hate something based on actually mythology. No skin off my nose. Leaving aside that I didn't do that.... I err... yeah, think I will dislike something based off Norse mythology. Loki gave birth to a horse in Norse mythology, if that happened in comics I'd dislike that as well. Just because it happened in the REAL myths of Thor, doesn't mean it 's a good idea to do it with the comic Thor. So you just... COMPLETELY ignored that one sentence where I very clearly articulated my reasons for dislike of the idea using completely Marvel Universe points as opposed to mythological ones? You think Loki and Amora aren't alike, I think that we don't need two green-wearing beautiful Asgardian sorceresses who are very close to Thor and who he has reluctant trust for while they scheme to backstab him by making alliances with other powerful villains. To each his own. I cannot believe I, of all people, am being painted as the needless hater on this site, but the fact remains that... I like this book. I know it may have slipped your notice, but I love Thor, I'm a big fan of JMS's reboot and while I have my criticisms, I'm in general overjoyed that the character has a writer who knows the classics, pays homage to them while moving on to something new and appreciates the power of the character. Believe it or not, the fact that I heavily dislike one aspect does not mean I despise the book, though I can see how you'd come to that conclusion on THIS website. |
|
|
|
Post by woodside on Dec 26, 2007 16:54:05 GMT -5
Here we go again . . .
LOKI IS HAWT!
|
|
|
|
Post by Tana Nile on Dec 26, 2007 19:55:25 GMT -5
But BK, 3 things: 1) We're not really discussing actual Norse mythology here, since this site isn't called "Norse Mythology Fans Assemble!"; we're discussing a heavily mythology-influenced superhero book (as per the original interpretation by Lee & Kirby) within the MU, which is by itself it's own mythology, after a fashion... Within that context, Loki, though still a shape-shifter, has always been basically a male entity, that's why some of us hope it's all part of a trick... After all, if we would wish to adhere steadfastedly to Norse Mythology canon, as you seem to suggest, we should have never seen Balder in the book in modern times, as he was killed through Loki's machinations! 2) We see it as a recent trend within Marvel to switch the sexes of a number of characters, especially villians... 3) We think it's unnecessary, because of the preexisting character of the Enchantress, already firmly embedded within the (Marvel) Thor mythos... 1) You can't talk about Thor with mythology, that is the bases of the charater, if you get rid of that, he is just a nother guy in tights. 2)I agree with that recent trend, you will notice however that that trend has been confined to bendis, who does not even explain why he is doing it. 3) Enchantress and Loki (being female or not) are nothing alike. Past the very basic idea of they both are gods and both use magic. It would short of be like comparing Wasp to Yellowjacket, they both shrink, they both are named after stinging insects, they both shot energy. Yet they are not the same charater. Sorry, but I don't see your complaints as being well thought out since they are based on one page of a comic. At least JMS is using the myths that the charater is based on rather then turning a robot into the now sex aid like bendis. First let me say that I do not like New Avengers, so that I can apparently establish some credibility. Now on to each point: 1) While Norse mythology is certainly the starting point for the Thor comic book character, the comic has never been completely dependent on or a strict literal adaptation of the myths. This is not a bad thing. Personally, I have no desire to see Thor pose as a bride to a storm giant. 2) I believe the idea expressed by many is that they are tired of seeing the needless gender-bending, regardless of whether it is the much-loathed Bendis doing it or anyone else. 3) So, despite the fact (as you partially state) that Loki and Enchantress are both gods, both use magic, have both been known to pull schemes on Thor, and both wear green, they are nothing alike? Okay, but I just don't see this passing the Duck test (if it walks like an Asgardian duck and quacks like an Asgardian duck...). But to each his own. Heck, you convinced me that Wasp and Yellowjacket are too similar to be on the Avengers at the same time! |
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Dec 27, 2007 8:38:09 GMT -5
Hmmm looked like you did to me, but whatever. You go ahead and hate something based on actually mythology. No skin off my nose. Leaving aside that I didn't do that.... I err... yeah, think I will dislike something based off Norse mythology. Loki gave birth to a horse in Norse mythology, if that happened in comics I'd dislike that as well. Just because it happened in the REAL myths of Thor, doesn't mean it 's a good idea to do it with the comic Thor. So you just... COMPLETELY ignored that one sentence where I very clearly articulated my reasons for dislike of the idea using completely Marvel Universe points as opposed to mythological ones? You think Loki and Amora aren't alike, I think that we don't need two green-wearing beautiful Asgardian sorceresses who are very close to Thor and who he has reluctant trust for while they scheme to backstab him by making alliances with other powerful villains. To each his own. I cannot believe I, of all people, am being painted as the needless hater on this site, but the fact remains that... I like this book. I know it may have slipped your notice, but I love Thor, I'm a big fan of JMS's reboot and while I have my criticisms, I'm in general overjoyed that the character has a writer who knows the classics, pays homage to them while moving on to something new and appreciates the power of the character. Believe it or not, the fact that I heavily dislike one aspect does not mean I despise the book, though I can see how you'd come to that conclusion on THIS website. How are you blaming the website for you making statements that make it look like you don't like something because it is to much like the enchantress. Yep, that is only reason I have seen so far as to the dislike. Oh well, you are just as welcome to your dislike of this as I am to my dislike of NA. later |
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Dec 27, 2007 8:43:13 GMT -5
1) You can't talk about Thor with mythology, that is the bases of the charater, if you get rid of that, he is just a nother guy in tights. 2)I agree with that recent trend, you will notice however that that trend has been confined to bendis, who does not even explain why he is doing it. 3) Enchantress and Loki (being female or not) are nothing alike. Past the very basic idea of they both are gods and both use magic. It would short of be like comparing Wasp to Yellowjacket, they both shrink, they both are named after stinging insects, they both shot energy. Yet they are not the same charater. Sorry, but I don't see your complaints as being well thought out since they are based on one page of a comic. At least JMS is using the myths that the charater is based on rather then turning a robot into the now sex aid like bendis. First let me say that I do not like New Avengers, so that I can apparently establish some credibility. Now on to each point: 1) While Norse mythology is certainly the starting point for the Thor comic book character, the comic has never been completely dependent on or a strict literal adaptation of the myths. This is not a bad thing. Personally, I have no desire to see Thor pose as a bride to a storm giant. 2) I believe the idea expressed by many is that they are tired of seeing the needless gender-bending, regardless of whether it is the much-loathed Bendis doing it or anyone else. 3) So, despite the fact (as you partially state) that Loki and Enchantress are both gods, both use magic, have both been known to pull schemes on Thor, and both wear green, they are nothing alike? Okay, but I just don't see this passing the Duck test (if it walks like an Asgardian duck and quacks like an Asgardian duck...). But to each his own. Heck, you convinced me that Wasp and Yellowjacket are too similar to be on the Avengers at the same time! 1) Granted however, things taken from the myths can be good, and it seems most people are just basing there hate on on page of a comic. Also, without the myths you would have no Thor. 2)I am tired of gender-bending without any explaination, how about we actually wait for the comic, which I don't think is out, to attack this one. From my understanding loki does this to trick thor into thinking he is bring back Sif, so that Loki can come back. Very much a loki trick in my thinking. 3) Perhaps I was to convincing. Sorry just don't see it, but each to his/her own. If you hate this, you are really going to hate who's soul is in the Destroyer armour. |
|
BigDuke
Reservist Avenger
Posts: 136
|
Post by BigDuke on Dec 27, 2007 11:27:11 GMT -5
Can we agree to wait until this comes out and we see the story before we decide to hate it? : )
I certainly agree that on the heels of the Trans-Ultron in MA, this gender bender seems to tap the same well of ideas. However, if we let this story stand on its own, we may like it. Loki has always been unpredictable and conniving. Maybe he put on the Sif like guise to trick Thor into freeing him from this weird trap/possession/trance thing the Asgardians have been in. He knew Thor would not help him but he would help Sif.
And I agree, we do not need two green clad asgardian chicks messing with Thor, even if one is blonde and one is brunette ; )
|
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Dec 27, 2007 13:01:24 GMT -5
I guess I didn't realize what a big deal two charaters wearing similar colors would be. I will have to remeber to tell everyone that I see that wears the same colors, that they are alike, and I don't need two of them. LOL. Yea that is silly, think about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Doom on Dec 27, 2007 16:02:45 GMT -5
Perhaps if the two people also look physically similar, act similarly, have similar powers, and have similar relations to the exact same people, then it would be just a tad more accurate as a metaphor?
|
|
|
|
Post by Black Knight on Dec 27, 2007 16:34:10 GMT -5
Perhaps if the two people also look physically similar, act similarly, have similar powers, and have similar relations to the exact same people, then it would be just a tad more accurate as a metaphor? If this was true, with Loki and Enchantress then perhaps I would agree, since it isn't the metaphor stands as is, still silly. Aside from female (many asgardians are female) the use of magic (many asgardians do that as well) and the color green, these charaters are not alike. Enchantress actual loves Thor, shown many times in the comics. She is a sorcerous and not the GOD of LIES and TRICKERY as Loki is. The similarities you all refer to, are superfical at best. Oh well at least we agree that the art on NA sucks. |
|
|
|
Post by spiderwasp on Dec 27, 2007 16:59:53 GMT -5
Believe it or not, the fact that I heavily dislike one aspect does not mean I despise the book, though I can see how you'd come to that conclusion on THIS website. Okay, Doom, this part was snarky. I actually think it's funny that you are suddenly on the other side. There are so many times that many other people have posted their complaints about one or two single aspects of a book and have been instantly pegged as a hater. This isn't something new. It's just new to see it happen to you. That however is not because the majority of people on THIS website quickly jump to conclusions that people are haters. It's most of us who are used to BEING accused of being haters. Just for the record though, I don't think you were being overly strong. You simply expressed your opinion that you don't think it's a good idea to have Loki presented as female. I just think it's ironic because, since the book hasn't come out yet, it would normally be you that's saying we should adopt a wait and see attitude. I've said before that I really don't like it when we judge based on a few panels of a book. |
|
|
|
Post by Doctor Bong on Dec 27, 2007 17:53:57 GMT -5
Believe it or not, the fact that I heavily dislike one aspect does not mean I despise the book, though I can see how you'd come to that conclusion on THIS website. Okay, Doom, this part was snarky. I actually think it's funny that you are suddenly on the other side. There are so many times that many other people have posted their complaints about one or two single aspects of a book and have been instantly pegged as a hater. This isn't something new. It's just new to see it happen to you. That however is not because the majority of people on THIS website quickly jump to conclusions that people are haters. It's most of us who are used to BEING accused of being haters. Just for the record though, I don't think you were being overly strong. You simply expressed your opinion that you don't think it's a good idea to have Loki presented as female. I just think it's ironic because, since the book hasn't come out yet, it would normally be you that's saying we should adopt a wait and see attitude. I've said before that I really don't like it when we judge based on a few panels of a book. Of course... I don't think anybody's going for the torches & the pitchforks just yet... We're merely considering the possibilities... |
|
|
|
Post by dlw66 on Jan 6, 2008 20:13:07 GMT -5
I'm chucking this photo in here simply because Loki is the topic of conversation. How about this great John Buscema homage, reminiscent of Silver Surfer #4, of the God of Mischief?? It will be a 2008 release from Bowen designs.  |
|
!!!
Everybody knows presents are delivered by the Big Three Wise Men: Reed, Tony and Hank... 
